Committee Reports > List of Committees > Joint > 1930 > Committee on the Courts of Justice Act 1924 and the Civil Jurisdiction of the Courts > Report - Courts of Justice Act 1924 and the civil jurisdiction of the Courts

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Deardaoin, 15adh Bealtaine, 1930.

Thursday, 15th May, 1930.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY MORRISSEY in the chair.

Mr. E. Herlihy, Land Commission, called and examined.

6154. Chairman.—Mr. Herlihy, you represent the Land Commission for the purpose of giving evidence on the question of taking proceedings against defaulting annuitants?—Yes.

6155. Do you think a system can be devised which will avoid the trouble and expense of court proceedings where the claim is admittedly due?—I think so.

6156. A system whereby a certificate of the Land Commission indicating that a claim is due may, subject to certain safeguards, have the force of a court decree?—Quite.

6157. Would the Land Commission favour any such procedure?—Yes. We have had it in our minds for some years past and certainly for the past six or seven months we have been developing the idea a good deal.

6158. Will you indicate briefly to the Committee the procedure of the Land Commission from the time legal proceedings are sanctioned until the decree is executed?—The present procedure is fairly simple. The bulk of Land Purchase Annuities falls due in November and December. The date of payment would be 14th November under some of the Land Acts or 14th December under other Land Acts.

6159. Senator Brown.—Are they annual?—No, twice a year; I am speaking of the last half-year. On or about 14th December the number of payments reach the peak point—something in the vicinity of twenty thousand a day. The number gradually diminishes until the point of about a thousand payments a day is reached. That would be about the 12th January. After that, as soon as we can get started, six-day notices are issued to tenant purchasers whose names appear on the default list. We have to keep in mind the fact that the accounts close on 31st January for the purpose of the Guarantee Fund, and the position of the Accounts at that date will form the basis of the demands on the rate-payers for rates to be struck on the next 1st April. The six-day notices expire as nearly as possible about 25th January, so as to enable moneys lodged in the banks to reach headquarters by 31st January. As soon as the accounts are balanced the schedules of defaulters are prepared for issue to State Solicitors.

6160. Chairman.—They are issued direct from the offices of the Land Commission to the State Solicitors?—Yes, the schedules of defaulters with instructions to proceed.

6161. What happens then?—The next step is the issue of a Civil Bill as quickly as possible.

6162. I suppose the Land Commission does not intimate to the State Solicitor which court he should proceed in, whether the District Court or the Circuit Court?—The general instruction is to institute proceedings for the earliest possible Court. We know as a fact that some State Solicitors for their convenience and for the convenience of tenant purchasers in certain Districts select the Circuit Court as being more suitable.

6163. But the instructions coming from the Land Commission to the State Solicitors are to proceed at the earliest court within the jurisdiction?—Quite.

6164. I take it that from the time you send the schedules to the State Solicitors the Land Commission has finished with the matter?—Unfortunately, no. Numerous late payments are received and that is rather the agonising part of our present machinery. I had an estimate made and I find that in about twelve days we had to return over £5,000 made up of various items varying from 5/- upwards.

6165. That was because they came in after the six days had expired?—No, after the schedules of defaulters had been issued from the office.

6166. When the State Solicitor takes those cases into the court and gets a decree, what happens?—Usually the State Solicitor communicates with the tenant purchaser intimating that a decree has been granted against him and invites payment of the principal debt, plus the costs applicable to the decree as at that date.

6167. If there is no response to that?— If there is no response then the instructions require the State Solicitor to hand the decree over to the Sheriff who adds on his fees.

6168. And in case the Sheriff cannot make any seizure or cannot recover?—Then he returns the decree marked “Nulla Bona” and the case has to be considered in the Land Commission.

6169. What happens then?—It depends on the look of the case. We take stock; we have a look around generally. We find it necessary from time to time in some districts to test the veracity of the return made by the Sheriff. Sometimes we find the return is not on a satisfactory basis and we ask some questions.

6170. If you find the Sheriff has made a true return and that there are no goods, what do you do then?—Ordinarily, the next step would be to put the farm up for sale. In some cases where a tenant has other income, where he is employed as a road contractor or engaged in other employment, possibly as a carpenter or a blacksmith, or something like that, we consider whether he should not be proceeded against under the Enforcement of Court Orders Act.

6171. And get the money paid by instalments?—That would be at the discretion of the District Justice.

6172. That would be the intention?—Yes. That is the class of case where the land is let or where the hay crop is sold by the tenant and no part of the proceeds made available for us.

6173. Can you give us any idea as to the number of cases in which the decree obtained is actually executed?—I am sorry I could not give you any figures on that basis for the reason that very often Court Messengers or the Sheriff secure payment by a visit to the tenant without the necessity for a levy. We do not know what happens in many cases, whether the money has been recovered as the result of distress and sale.

6174. Could you give us a rough idea?—The number of cases in which distress is actually levied is not large. The cases vary, of course, in different counties. In County Kerry the number would be rather large; in Monaghan possibly not more than three or four dozen cases in the year, and in Mayo the number would be still less.

6175. What is the explanation of that?—The position usually is that where there is money it is paid to the Sheriff as a result of the letter issuing from his Office, or it is paid to the Court Messenger. Where there is economic pressure the Court Messenger uses a little discretion; he would go again possibly after a fair and get the money, or something like that. If the tenant is in poor circumstances and the Court Messenger did not like the look of the couple of old cows on the holding he would prefer not to levy. The expense and worry would hardly be repaid out of the proceeds of sale.

6176. Where a Sheriff or Court Messenger cannot make a seizure and the decree is returned “Nulla Bona,” and where the Land Commission are satisfied that this is a true return and they put the farm in question up for sale, does the Land Commission find a difficulty in getting a purchaser?—Yes, it is very difficult.

6177. I suppose you could sell only a very small number of the holdings which would be put up for sale?—I think the present figure is in the vicinity of 60 per cent. of the holdings offered for sale.

6178. Senator Brown.—I would have thought it was more in the region of 6 per cent.—Possibly I should add that frequently the holding is purchased by somebody with an interest in it.

6179. Deputy Wolfe.—A creditor?

6180. Senator Comyn.—Or the tenant himself?—We could not sell to him.

6181. Could you sell to somebody for him—his wife, say?—Possibly, as long as we knew there was no collusion.

6182. You would not look into the question of collusion. Your concern would be to get the money?—That is so, but the question of collusion is considered.

6183. You would not inquire very closely into the question of collusion?—Except we had some impression that the offer to purchase was not bona fide.

6184. Perhaps a son might want to break the title?—Quite so, or there might be some evidence of domestic unhappiness.

6185. Chairman.—I dare say you are conversant with the suggestion that the certificate of the Land Commission that a debt is due should, subject to safeguards, have the force of a decree against the annuitant?—Yes. The idea coincides with what we ourselves had in mind.

6186. Can you give us any idea of what saving it would effect? The costs of a decree are small relatively to the execution of a decree?—The costs are not small in the lower zones of debt; they are relatively high. It is appalling that a debt of 13s. 4d. should have costs of approximately 11s., and a debt of £2 9s. 0d. should have costs amounting to £1 3s. 0d.

6187. Court costs?—Yes, prior to the stage when the case reached the Sheriff. That is the aspect of the system that appears to me, personally, as a hardship.

6188. Senator Brown.—That is up to and including the decree?—Yes, including everything up to that.

6189. Chairman.—What I want to get from you is this—would you agree that the costs of a decree are relatively small compared with the costs of an execution?—It all depends. What is in my mind is to cut out what I regard as unnecessary costs. The document that I have in my mind would reach the Sheriff. It would be called by a different name, but it would have precisely the same force as the decree has now, but the costs of the decree would disappear. My certificate would reach the Sheriff as a document without any costs whatsoever and would have the same force as a decree minus in the case mentioned, a sum of £1 3s. 0d. or so for costs. Take the case of an annuitant who would have to sell his last calf to pay the annuity of £2 9s. 0d. and add to that under the present system £1 3s. 0d. for costs. That is the last straw very often. Unfortunately, the instalments of a great number of our tenants are under £5, £7 or £10.

6190. Your idea would be to cut out, almost altogether, Court proceedings?—Yes, except in cases where some objection was lodged as the result of our letter telling the defaulter that if the debt is not paid within a certain specified date, a certificate would go to the Sheriff by reference to a section in the proposed Land Bill.

6191. Under the scheme about which we are now talking would there be any danger of a wrongful seizure owing to the case not having come before the Judge—what steps would be taken to protect the annuitant?—I do not see that there would be any danger. Mathematically our system of accounts is foolproof. The moneys are paid through the banks or direct to the Office of the Land Commission where the cash received in twelve months amounts to about one and a half million pounds. Possibly I should inform the Committee that we have about 450,000 accounts. About one and a half million pounds are sent to the Land Commission direct by money orders, postal orders, notes and bank drafts. The Bank of Ireland and the various banks throughout the country receive large numbers of payments. All the payments into the Bank of Ireland and to the various other banks are listed at the Head Office of the Bank of Ireland. The relative receivable orders are then sent to us with the lists. All these moneys, plus the moneys received in the Land Commission Office itself are put through our own balancing system. We have to segregate the items into the various Land Purchase accounts, separating sums in respect of capital. We have to balance every account by reference to the aggregate of what is paid in through the Bank of Ireland and what we receive ourselves. Each pocket must balance in the aggregate with the total money. If not the accounts must be gone over again. If there is one penny out that penny must be found before any account is touched. As a result of that process we have two sets of documents, (1) lists of the moneys under the various Land Purchase accounts, and (2) the receivable orders. Where the annuitant sends money without the relative receivable order we prepare a “dummy” form for the purpose of accounting only. The receivable orders always contain the reference number of the annuitant’s account. They are despatched from the general section to the various county sections of the Branch where the account is posted by reference to the particulars appearing on the receivable order. In order to ensure accuracy there is a check of the work by a reliable officer by reference to the adding machine lists previously prepared. The lists have to be signed by the officer who posted from the receivable orders and also by the independent officer who checks his work. As a further test of accuracy the accounts are balanced every quarter. We know what ought to come in. We know what has come in by reference to our lists of payments and then the items in default are abstracted. If the accounts do not balance, the whole thing has to be gone over again and if there is even one penny out that penny must be found. When we reach the point of abstracting the names and moneys due by defaulting annuitants we do so by reference to balanced accounts.

6192. As regards this scheme that we are discussing, or that was suggested, apart from the saving which it would mean to-day to the annuitant in the way of Court costs, what effect would it have on the Land Commission—would it mean extra expense or would it bring about a saving?—My own view is that it will cut down a certain fraction of what I would call circumlocutionary work. It will enable us to go direct to the Sheriff with cases that are fit subjects for him, and it will enable the present staff to do work which they are not at present able to reach, such as the heavy work that follows the return of “Nulla Bona” decrees or the abortive efforts to sell holdings of defaulters.

6193. Of course that would remain?—It would remain, but at the moment it is not as effectively attended to as it might be. I am hoping that we will be able to save sufficient time of the staff to do that work more effectively if the scheme now suggested is put into force.

6194. What I am trying to get at is this—that under the scheme which is indicated you cut out as far as possible the Court procedure and the Court costs?—Yes.

6195. But if the annuitant does not pay his annuity, then the machinery of the Sheriff’s office must be used as now, except that then he would be acting on your certificate instead of as at present on the Court decree?—Precisely.

6196. I would like to know from you why do you think that you would have less work for the sheriff under the suggested system?—Because I am convinced that the scheme would be more effective. At the moment, every half year we have to issue something like 120,000 six day notices. That is about the number roughly. My own feeling is that we would say in this notice that if payment is not made at the end of six days from the date appearing in the notice that proceedings will be taken. I am inclined to think that the present six day notice is not as effective as it might be. The multitude know that two or three months will possibly elapse before they hear anything more from us, and they will not, in fact, hear anything more until they get a Civil Bill. Where the annuitant has the money to pay, my idea is the notice under the new law would have more of a sting. It would be more alarming, and where they had the money or where they could raise it, they would respond.

6197. That is the real difference between the certificate and the present six-day notice?—Yes. If as a result of that letter containing a threat that proceedings would be taken by the Sheriff, the annuitant in cases where he had paid would write back saying: “You are altogether wrong in this demand; I have already paid,” we would then immediately set our house in order and see whether he had. Quite possibly, he may have paid on account of the crossing of letters in the Post Office or the delay in remitting by a local Bank. We could not possibly wait to issue those notices until all the money has come in. The notices are kept back until the number of items coming in daily is down to the lowest point. We cannot wait indefinitely, because we must issue the notices in order that they will be effective in time and so save a heavy draw on the Guarantee Fund.

6198. Senator Brown.—The saving to the Land Commission would be the form in which the certificate gets into the hands of the sheriff?—Yes, as a result of more effective machinery.

6199. Would there be any saving in actual expense or money at later stages?—That, of course, would depend on how far the new system would be effective. As you know, it is far easier to deal with ten annuitants who pay than with one who is in default. He is aware that he is in default, and that we are not finished with the issue of the notice. Letters are now coming in at an enormous rate. Last year we dealt with something in the vicinity of 110,000 letters.

6200. Chairman.—I think you told us that you had about 450,000 accounts?—Yes.

6201. You told us afterwards that you send out about 120,000 six-day notices?—That would be roughly the number.

6202. That means that less than two-thirds of the tenants pay their annuities within the specified time?—About that. It varies, as you know, in different counties.

6203. I am taking the State as a whole for the moment. Can you give us any idea what percentage of that 120,000 would respond to the six-day notices?—A good fraction. It varies in the counties.

6204. Let us take the State as a whole?—Of the 120,000 I should say that well over fifty per cent. respond to the six-day notice.

Senator Brown.—That brings you down to 60,000 still outstanding.

6205. Chairman.—I take it that, if this scheme were put into operation, the services of the State Solicitors for this class of work will be required only when the annuitant contests the claim?—Disputes the veracity of our figure or of our account, which is very rare. The debt is a recurring decimal. We are simply looking for in December what we looked for and got the previous June.

6206. Of course, you told us that the Land Commission certificate of the amount due would be sent direct to the Sheriff?—Yes, it would. He would then be required by us administratively to demand payment.

6207. How would the position be affected by the decision to impose the duties of outgoing sheriff on the County Registrar?—The position would not vary except, of course, by reference to the personnel—an efficient County Registrar replacing an efficient Sheriff. It is precisely at the same position. It will depend on the efficiency of the officer—the County Registrar or the Sheriff.

6208. You have personal experience of e collection of State debts by machinery substituted for the ordinary Court proceedings?—Yes, I have in connection with the Revenue Department—income tax only. That is the only State Department in which I had that experience.

6209. Would you give us an idea of your experience in the working of that machinery?—There we rather confined it to the bigger class of defaulting taxpayer who would be beyond the collector of taxes—somebody in a big way of business where the ability of the collector of taxes would not be equal to the job, and the Sheriff was likely to prove more compelling. The name of the Sheriff and his machinery were more suitable than the collector of taxes, who could not possibly have the experience necessary to handle a big proposition like that. Of course, over and above the powers that were given to the Revenue under Section 7 of the Finance Act of 1923, the collector of taxes has precisely the same power which the Sheriff was given.

6210. Senator Comyn.—And always exercised it in the case of small debts?—Small and big.

6211. You say that in the big cases, where he might not have sufficient experience to deal with the big propositions, such as the collection of £400 or £500, you usually left that to the Sheriff?—We issued our certificate to the Sheriff. Of course, in Scotland they always had power to go direct to the Sheriff, which possibly explains the fact that the cost of the collection of the revenue in Scotland was always the lowest of the three countries.

Chairman.—The question of the collection of land annuities is bad enough, and I do not think we will go into the collection of income tax.

6212. Senator Brown.—You told us that about 120,000 of the annuitants did not respond before the six-day notice, and that then about half of them responded?—Half of the 120,000 paid after receipt of the six-day notice.

6213. That will be about 60,000. Can you give us any idea of how many paid before being decreed?—You will get that inferentially when I tell you that 21,000 cases were actually issued to the State Solicitors in March of this year. That is an approximate figure. I can only speak approximately.

6214. Can you give us any idea from how many of the 21,000 you actually do in the end recover?—I could not tell you that, because that 21,000 will include tenant purchasers who owe more than the December ’29 instalment.

6215. You have often to sue for more than one instalment?—Yes.

6216. That is, the time given for one instalment overlaps the next one and then you have to go for two?—Yes.

6217. Senator Comyn.—Do you say that the method that you suggest would mean a saving in your clerical staff?—I am anticipating it would. I can only anticipate because my estimate is based on the machine being more efficient.

6218. Do you propose that the service of this notice of intention to issue a certificate of debt on the tenant purchaser should be by post or personally?—Oh, by post. It would be too big a thing the other way.

6219. Senator Brown.—Registered post?—No, sir, ordinary post. We would swamp the Post Office otherwise. It would choke the postal machine.

Senator Brown.—It may choke the tenant purchaser if he does not get it.

6220. Senator Comyn.—I understand that your system of accounting is so perfect by long tots and cross tots that the figure could not fail to be right, but what security have you that the person sought to be made liable is the right person?—We are going to the person in December to whom we went in June and from whom we got money. That is the way the columns are filled up. December ’28 is paid, June ’29 is paid, and then December is not paid.

6221. Suppose there was a change by death or by assignment of interest?—That is exactly one of the causes that has created difficulty with us. In connection with that what I have in my mind is to make the land liable by law independently of the name of the occupier for the time being, because we are baffled frequently to know where there is a death or intestacy whether it is Mary Kate or John Joe is the legal owner. We want to get information, but when we take proceedings a person turns up in Court and says: “John Joe does not own it. I do not know whether it is Dick’s or Mary’s,” with the result that our proceedings are dismissed.

6222. What you want to enter is not a judgment personally, but a judgment in rem against the land?—I want legislative power to recover by reference to the occupier for the time being, to recover on the land and leave the consequences to follow ownership.

6223. By seizure on the land?—If necessary in the long run. But if, of course, after a death, administration was pending we certainly would not think of issuing a certificate in any case where there was any reasonable defence or a letter saying “We have no money at the moment. We do not know precisely who is the owner. We are putting our affairs in order and we are going to a solicitor to take out administration. We will settle when probate is granted,” or something of that kind. We would not think of moving in a case like that.

6224. Suppose a man who paid you in June happened, as a result of an ejectment on title or as a result of an assignment or for some other cause, to leave the holding. It is to that man you would send your letter at that address?—We would send it to the person named in the assignment, the deed or the instrument.

6225. It is against him the certificate of indebtedness would issue?—Yes.

6226. And that certificate of indebtedness would be sent to the Sheriff and might be executed by the Sheriff?—Yes.

6227. Although the man was not there? —But the land remains.

6228. You would not execute against the land?—If John Jones sold a farm of land to Tom Muldoon, Tom Muldoon would get an indemnity against the vending tenant with regard to rates, land purchase annuities, etc. He would not part with the purchase money until he had put his house in order.

6229. I am talking of a case where a man has gone out of possession for one reason or another, and there is a certificate of indebtedness in his name in the hands of the Sheriff. Perhaps he knows nothing about it until the messenger comes to him and the person who is at another place altogether different from the holding?—But it is not his place. The Sheriff will go to the lands on which the Land Purchase annuity is charged.

6230. What you would provide is that the certificate of debt should be effective only against the land, and not as against the person named apart from the land?—That is so. It is not a personal liability. It is a liability directly associated with and arising out of the land.

6231. Do you propose in issuing a certificate of debt to hold it for any time in your hands before sending it to the Sheriff?—That would depend, of course, on the correspondence that has taken place with the office. If there is a response and a promise that looks on the face of it, healthy, sound and well founded, if, for instance, default in ing the December instalment is due specific cause, loss of cattle or dea the family, we would pass on to the case and wait until the time for the fu of the promise arrived. We could keep that case back.

6232. Of course, you appreciate the fac that the certificates of debt are sent to the Sheriff immediately after issue, and it is quite possible you may have the Sheriff’s costs far exceeding the gain, by cutting out the Court?—No. I would require the Sheriff on receipt of my certificate to apply to the tenant for the amount of the debt, intimating that unless it was paid he would proceed to levy. I have in mind a capitation figure where the amount due would be under £1. To this would be added one shilling, Sheriff’s fee. The letter from the Sheriff would, in the great majority of cases, fetch the money, if available.

6233. Is it your idea that the moment you make out your certificate it is transmitted to the Sheriff, or will you hold it for ten or fifteen days?—We will take the thing historically. By the 21st of January a letter is issued from the office to defaulters, telling them what we have in mind. We could not possibly move earlier than the end of February, because our accounts would not be balanced. The certificate would issue if nothing transpired subsequent to the issue of the notice to pay.

6234. Supposing that on the 20th February you sent notice to the tenant of your intention to issue a certificate of debt, and that that expired on the 1st or 2nd of March, when you would be entitled to make out the certificate, would you send the certificate to the Sheriff or would you hold it for another fortnight or three week?—I would like to refer to the 21st January again. I must keep that date in mind, because as much money as possible must be collected by the 31st January, the closing date for the payment of interest and sinking fund on the stock. We must feed the land purchase accounts to enable the dividends on the stock to be paid. The six-days’ notice given in the letter expires about the 27th January, so as to enable money lodged in Skibbereen or Ballina to come through. Nothing will happen unless there is a letter from the tenant giving a satisfactory explanation for his default or promising to pay. Work on the balancing of the accounts proceeds, and sometime towards the end of February, certificates are issued to the Sheriff.

6235. On what date would you serve a six or a ten-days notice of your intention to issue a certificate of debt—On January Act.

6236. The ten days would expire on the r January, and you would become ed, according to your scheme, to the certificate of debt?—I would.

6237. Would you send it to the Sheriff immediately, or would you hold it over for 10 days?—I would send it to the Sheriff immediately if there was no reason for further delay.

6238. When would you have your house in order so as to enable you to send the certificate to the Sheriff?—Towards the end of February.

6239. Therefore, you would keep it in the office for two or three weeks?—That is because of the necessity for accounting arrangements.

6240. Would it not also have the indirect advantage that you would get a number of debts from the tenant purchasers?—Yes, but that advantage would continue until Tibb’s Eve. As long as the Land Commission remain inactive money will come in from some tenants, but there is an encroachment into the period when the next instalment falls due.

6241. The moment you send the certificate of debt to the Sheriff, does he not become entitled to his costs?—Yes, but they are relatively small.

6242. Would you propose to make any rules or regulations limiting the amount of costs the Sheriff is to get?—Even at present, if the debt is £1, the Sheriff will only get 1/-.

6243. Senator Brown.—What about a levy?—I do not anticipate a levy. If the Sheriff has to collect £1 he would get it in many cases by demanding it. A letter from the Sheriff making the demand will certainly meet with a response where the money is available.

6244. Senator Comyn.—Then the Sheriff would only get 1/- in the £?—Yes.

6245. Supposing he makes a levy?—He is in precisely the same position as he is is now in the case of a fieri facias or a decree.

6246. Senator Brown.—Is he obliged to write for the debt?—He would be.

6247. Senator Comyn.—You propose to make a new law for that?—There would be no difficulty about that. No Sheriff would go out to levy the moment he got a decree. A sheriff first seeks the debt plus the statutory fee by a letter, unless he gets express instruction from us that he is not to wait.

6248. Supposing a sheriff was in this position, that he knew the debtor had seizable assets, and that if he wrote the debtor would make away with the assets, what would happen?—We would take that risk.

6249. Senator Brown.—Would the Sheriff take it?—He would in a Land Commission or other State case as the lands remain as security.

6250. Senator Comyn.—I want you to consider this. Do you not see that you are leaving it to the discretion of the Sheriff whether he is to get 1/- in the £1 or 10/- in the £1?—Even so.

6251. Would you leave it to the discretion of the Sheriff?—I would, because he has that discretion at the moment.

6252. Would it not be better to give the Sheriff a standing salary?—I would not. The effective sheriff is the one who has to live on his activity.

Senator Farren.—On his wits.

Chairman.—The sheriff will have a standing salary in future.

6253. Senator Comyn.—On the plunder. I am not saying that in an offensive way. Do you appreciate that there is any difficulty in that?—Not a bit.

6254. Senator Brown.—I would like to clear up one thing. There are 120,000 tenants who owe annuities for over six months?—Thereabouts.

6255. You give them notice by post?—Yes.

6256. If you change the system, the certificate will issue after six days?—Yes.

6257. And you propose to serve that through the ordinary post?—Quite.

6258. Your office seems to be worked in a way to minimise mistakes as far as possible?—That is so.

6259. You will be sending 120,000 letters through the post, some of which may not be delivered at all?—Yes.

6260. The Sheriff may break in on a man who has not actually received the original notice to pay?—Even so, he has himself to blame.

6261. Of course he has himself to blame when he did not pay in time?—Quite.

6262. Do you not think that is a rather drastic process? You are not providing sufficiently against mistakes in the delivery of the notices. At present he gets the original notice before he is served with the process and he can get rid of the matter by paying a few shillings before it is entered?—Not a few shillings.

6263. It is about 6/- on a £5 claim?— Yes, but before anything like that happens he will have got a letter from the Sheriff requiring payment.

6264. That is very late?—There is nothing in it before that. The Sheriff writes to the tenant for the amount.

6265. The Sheriff is not bound to write? —We will require him to write.

6266. You will put a statutory duty on the Sheriff?—To demand payment by letter.

6267. Do you recognise that that would be a necessary part of the system you are planning?—I have that in mind. In order that nothing drastic may happen there will be a written communication from the Sheriff.

Senator Brown.—My mind is clear now and I understand the matter.

6268. Deputy Wolfe.—Do you realise that at the present moment the bulk of the State Solicitor’s work is done after the decree is pronounced in Court?—The bulk of the State Solicitor’s work ought not to be done after the decree is pronounced.

6269. Let us see what the work consists of. It is work that you think in justice to the annuitants should be got rid of. After the decree he has to find out whether the defendant can pay or whether he requires time. You would get rid of that?—Yes.

6270. You would not extend to the annuitants the mercy they get from the State Solicitor?—The State Solicitor is not permitted to do that.

6271. That is your way of looking at the matter, that that should be abolished; that the defendants should not enter the State Solicitor’s office and that the solicitor should not have power to write to the Land Commission begging for time under the peculiar circumstances. All that is to be got rid of?—Yes.

6272. Would you allow the State Solicitor to write to find that out?—That is not his business at all.

6273. Would you allow him to write to the unfortunate defendant after getting the decree?—Yes, that is the practice.

6274. That is no part of his duty. At present, he does it, out of mercy to the defendant, free of expense to the defendant or the State?—I do not know that you are right there. On a decree for a debt of £2 9s. 9d. the defendant would have to pay £1 3s. costs.

6275. I am talking of the work he after the decree and for which he g remuneration whatever. He has correspondence with the defendant, and many cases, he collects the money and f wards it to the Land Commission. I B does that at present without any cost to the State or to the defendant. Do you realise that?—I am aware that in a very limited number of cases a defaulter will communicate with the State Solicitor. I also know that the State Solicitor is required by his instructions to pass on to us for consideration applications for an extension of time. The solicitor is not allowed any discretion and, therefore, his job ought to be finished when he gets the decree.

6276. Would you not expect him to collect the money which is tendered to him?—Certainly.

6277. There is no duty on him to collect it?—There is. If the money is tendered to the State Solicitor after the decree is granted he has to take it. It is part of his job.

6278. Can you tell me under what regulation is it part of his job?—Under our regulations.

6279. Will you show me the regulations? —I have not got them before me, but it is part of the instructions a Solicitor gets from us. If the money is tendered any time prior to the handing of the decree to the Sheriff the solicitor is required to take it.

6280. Your suggestion, I take it, is that all post-decree work which at present is done free of expense to the State will be done free of expense by the Land Commission officials. Are you serious?—I am perfectly serious.

6281. And I take it they will not do it for nothing. Do you know that there are such things as Court Messengers?—Yes.

6282. Do you know that their being kept in existence is an expense to the State?—That is so.

6283. Do you know that necessarily if the Land Commission civil bills are got rid of you will have all the Court Messengers in Saorstát Eireann looking for an increase of the State grant with an unanswerable case. Do you realise that?—I am not concerned with that.

6284. Then I take it from you you are not concerned with the great increase thatyou are putting on the general taxpayer if your scheme is carried out?—I am rather concerned with the problem of getting from the tenant purchaser his debt the minimum of cost to himself and Land Commission.

6285. You have pointed out that the of the decree are relatively small comparison with the costs of the ecution of the decree?—Yes, where the decree has to be executed.

6286. You have been good enough to tell us already that in an average case the costs of the decree are relatively small in comparison with the costs of the execution of that decree. Do you not see it must necessarily follow that if the scheme which you suggest is adopted and approved of the number of executions of decrees will necessarily be very largely increased?—No, I do not see that will follow at all. The point will be rapidly reached when instead of the decree a document will reach the Sheriff minus the costs. Take a debt of £2 9s. 9d., a decree for that reaches the Sheriff with £1 3s. added. My document will reach him without the £1 3s., so that you cut off aproximately 50 per cent. of the debt of the tenant purchaser and you will get him straight away as a client of the Sheriff with only 1/- in the £ added.

6287. Do you mean 1/- in the pound?— Yes, 1/- in the £ on the £2 9s..

6288. Or £150?—If the debt was £150, Yes.

6289. Do you not realise that the number of your documents, as you call them, which will reach the Sheriff will be considerably higher than the number of Circuit and District Court decrees that reach him at present?—No. I am perfectly satisfied that the number of cases that will reach the Sheriff will be far short of the number that goes to the State Solicitor at present.

6290. Your Department has been considering this matter for a considerable time?—Yes.

6291. Are you aware that in consequence of the increments State Solicitors receive from Land Commission civil bills their salaries have been largely reduced, and do you not see that they must be restored if you take away this work from them?—I have an idea that State Solicitors are paid by reference to a standing salary and by reference to the perquisites they derive from the work of the Land Commission and Board of Works, etc.

6292. Are you aware that their standing salaries have been considerably reduced within a short period having regard to the increments which they were receiving from Land Commission civil bills?—I do not see how the Land Commission work could be taken as a basis.

6293. When you were contemplating the change had you before you the fact that their salaries had been considerably reduced by, I think, 25 per cent?—I am not aware of that.

6294. Had you that before you—No. I did not consider this scheme in relation to the salaries of State Solicitors.

6295. Then you did not consider the largely increased expense that must be placed on the State by restoring the State Solicitors to the status quo?—Even if I considered it I would still be concerned with my own problem.

6296. I am not saying that, but you did not consider it?—No; it is not part of my case.

6297. Have you considered the question that you can only deal with the Sheriff’s salary or a change in his emoluments (in many cases, at all events) by giving him adequate compensation for what you take off him?—The Sheriff is not being deprived of anything under my scheme. He will be in the same position as he is as regards decrees.

6298. You said something about making local inquiries. Who makes the inquiries at present?—Concerning what?

6299. The existence or non-existence of the proposed defendant, the residence or non-residence of the proposed defendant, and the numerous inquiries that arise in the ordinary course in connection with the issue of civil bills. Who makes these inquiries for you at present?—We utilise the services of our inspectors.

6300. That is, where you have inspectors—where land purchase is pending?— Yes.

6301. Your inspectors, as a rule, have nothing to say to land that has been vested?—Yes, they have.

6302. Let me give you a concrete instance that I know took place in connection with a State Solicitor as recently as Friday last relating to three Land Commission civil bills. Bill No. 1 was adjourned on special circumstances shown by the defendant as a result of correspondence with the State Solicitor in order to give the defendant the opportunity of paying without running the risk of costs of the decree and execution. In case No. 2 the decree was granted and half an hour or so later a messenger arrived withsome money from the poor old woman who had to pay. The money was short of the amount of the debt. That led to correspondence by the State Solicitor resulting in payment of the money short of costs of the decree. In case No. 3, as a result of a letter, it was discovered that a defendant had not died who was alleged to have died prior to the issue of the civil bill. Do you think that work could be as well done from the State point of view in your office as it was done by the State Solicitor?—I have not the slightest doubt it would be better done in my office.

6303. In other words, you would discover by wireless whether a man was alive or dead?—We would discover it by ordinary investigation.

6304. From your inspectors?—Or otherwise. We have various channels of information.

6305. You think that in the instances I have given the work would be better done by the Land Commission than by the State Solicitor?—There is no work being done. You say that in particular cases certain things happened.

6306. Three cases were heard on a single day, last Friday, and I have told you what happened in each of the three. What I want to point out is that in each of the three cases you required local knowledge in order to treat the defendants with humanity and at the same time observe the law?—No, there is no day of the year in which we have, not three, but forty, fifty, or sixty cases of that type.

6307. You think that you would be as well able as the State Solicitor to find out from Merrion Street whether a land annuitant was dead?—No doubt. We get news rapidly.

6308. You know that in scores of cases you have issued decrees, even with the assistance of the State Solicitor, against people who were dead and buried?—Yes, but that means nothing.

6309. Let us see the position of the Land Commission under the proposed change. You issue a warrant against a dead person. Do you propose that the Sheriff must execute that against the land or against the stock?—He would recover the debt mentioned in the certificate on the land.

6310. You would make that lawful?— Certainly.

6311. Did you ever hear of a gentleman called Lenin?—I think so.

6312. Do you think that he would stand for executing a decree against a man who had gone to another and happier land?—I did not say that it w a decree.

6313. Call it, if you like, your Would you make your do issued against a dead man a good ment?—My document would simply the lands on which the Sheriff was operate by reference to the individual who owns or did own it.

6314. If it is only against the land, why issue a notice against the man, whether living or dead?—Whoever is there ought to know that the debt has to be paid.

6315. You have some experience of the Income Tax Department?—Yes.

6316. And you think it would be good for land annuitants to get a dose of income tax treatment?—It would do a lot of them good.

6317. When considering that, did you think of the number of people who lost their lives as the result of income tax treatment?—I think that is an extraordinary statement to make.

Deputy Wolfe.—It may be extraordinary, but I have seen numerous and very sad instances of it.

6318. Senator O’Rourke.—Do you give any discretion to the State Solicitor in regard to the extension of time?—He is required to communicate with us first.

6319. When you send out a six or ten days’ notice and the annuitant writes up to say that he cannot pay, say, until the April fair, do you take any notice of that?—That is one of our problems and it will, of course, be also associated with the new scheme. After issuing the 120,000 notices, we get numerous appeals for time. The reasons assigned are various. I recall one case where the defaulter said that he could not pay owing to the marriage of his daughter, the matrimonial expenses being heavy. In another case the cow died; and in another the husband died, and so on.

6320. Do you ignore every one of these? —No; but the work is heavy and the cases numerous. Proceedings have to be taken within a specified time and we must get on with the work. Where a case obviously calls for consideration it is withheld.

6321. Under the new system the Sheriff will be much in the same position as the State Solicitor at present. If people tell a decent yarn, say, about selling cattle at the next fair he would not seize?—That is common sense. He would pass on to us what he considers to be a reasonable plea.

6322. He would not hand it to the bailiff?—No.

6323. Senator Farren.—Could you give us any idea as to the total amount paid to State Solicitors in connection with the work of land annuities?—I would not like to make an estimate, because it varies in the different counties. It is heavier, for instance, in Kerry than in Mayo or Monaghan.

6324. Could you give the aggregate amount?—No, I am afraid I could not.

6325. Does the money paid to State Solicitors arising out of land annuities come from defaulters?—Yes. Costs directly associated with civil bills are payable by defaulting tenant purchasers.

6326. Under your scheme you propose to save the annuitants those extra costs in regard to State Solicitors?—Yes. If the element of compulsion has to be resorted to in the long run by the Sheriff his costs only will apply.

Deputy Wolfe.—And thereby you dismiss the clerical assistants.

6327. Senator Farren.—You state that for a debt of £2 9s. the cost at the point where the decree is issued is £1 3s.?—Yes, about that.

6328. Under your scheme you propose to eliminate that?—Yes.

6329. In addition to the £1 3s. when a decree is obtained the ordinary expenses of the Sheriff arise as under your scheme? —Yes.

6330. Your proposal is to save the unfortunate annuitant who is unable to pay the cost amounting to £1 3s. apart from the £2 9s.?—Yes.

6331. In regard to the question of work done by State Solicitors in helping annuitants with regard to delay and everything else, when your notice is issued to a defaulting annuitant can he write, or get somebody on his behalf to write, to your Department as he would in the case of a State Solicitor?—Yes, our post is very heavy.

6332. Arising out of the question put by Senator O’Rourke I imagine that a good deal would depend on the character of the tenant. I do not mean his moral character but that his willingness and promptitude in paying former demands would weigh with you when a claim is made—when he makes an excuse, for instance, about his daughter getting married and so on?—Yes. Where a tenant over a series of half years shows clearly that he is a person who would not be in default except through a specific cause we would nurse that case.

6333. And you would not send that to the Sheriff?—No. We would not think of doing it. We would send no case to the Sheriff in which a tenant said that he had not the money to pay now but that he was about to sell calves or pigs and would send the money later on. Such a case would weigh with us, but we have many cases in which we would not even get that much of a response.

6334. In regard to the procedure about issuing certificates, your scheme is that after the issue of a six-days’ notice nearly two months would elapse before it would be put into operation?—That is so, except in the case of tenants who ought to have responded and are quite capable of paying but would not pay. They can measure precisely when the civil bills are due to arrive. The latter belongs to the class of tenant purchasers we want to get at rapidly in order to save the ratepayers who are willing to bear their own burden.

6335. Under your scheme the certificate of the Land Commission would have the same effect as the notices in regard to rates sent out by the Dublin Corporation? —Yes, or County Council.

6336. I imagine that the difficulties which Deputy Wolfe put forward are not likely to arise in the case of dead men. In the case of a tenant in occupation of a house in Dublin who is not the owner, the Corporation are entitled, if the rates are not paid, to send in the Sheriff to seize his goods though he is not the owner. You would be in the same position in regard to land; your certificate would be against the land and not against the person?—That is so. Whoever is on the land will have the duty on him of seeing that that debt is paid sooner or later.

6337. As in the case of a tenant occupier in Dublin?—Yes.

Deputy Wolfe.—I may point out that a rate made on a dead man is void even in Dublin.

Senator Farren.—I beg your pardon. The occupying tenant has to pay or his goods are seized. The rate is made on the premises.

6338. You are satisfied that your proposed scheme will be more efficient than the present one, and that from the point of view of the annuitants it would save a good deal of expense?—Yes.

6339. Generally speaking, taking them on the average, is it a case of inability to pay?—That is so, but you will find in every district an occupier of land who will divert to other avenues money that should be made available for rates and land purchase annuities.

6340. I am not familiar with the position, because I am a city man. On the average, in the case of the annuitants who fail to pay, is it because of inability to pay?—That is so, substantially.

6341. So that, in the majority of cases, we will say where the payments are not made under the present system, we are adding to the burden of these unfortunate people who do not pay because of their inability to pay. Under your scheme we would save them that?—That sums it up.

6342. Senator Hooper.—I suppose you are aware that this question of land annuities has assumed importance in our deliberations because of the complaints made that defaulting annuitants were excessively burdened in respect of the cost of decrees?—Yes.

6343. It was in order to relieve them of that burden that this suggestion of an alternative scheme first came before us?—Yes.

6344. We wanted something less burdensome. Now it seems to me that the idea has changed somewhat and that instead of trying to get a system that would relieve the annuitant of this burden we are looking for a system that is more efficient from the point of view of collection?—The more efficient it is the more relief will be given to the tenant purchasers as a whole. The larger the sum in default the greater is the burden on the ratepayers. Tenants who have paid their annuities and rates will have to pay more rates next year because of the default of their neighbours. The more effective we are in recovering the Land Commission debt the greater the relief we can give.

6345. I accept that entirely, but it seems to me in relieving them of the financial burden we may impose a system on them which is perhaps harder and certainly more rigid than they have at present?—Not a bit. The Sheriff is the effective arm for compelling the unwilling. The Sheriff will get a document called by another name which will give him all the powers of the present decree.

6346. You have the arm of the law in operation at a much earlier period?—In suitable cases.

6347. Why do you say in suitable cases? Surely in all cases where the annuities are in default?—I have in my mind a number of cases where money is withheld for reasons associated with knowledge as to when it is possible for the law to be set in motion.

6348. You bring down the arm of the law at a much earlier period than at present?—In particular cases I will be able to do so.

6349. Cannot you do so in all cases of defaulters?—Under the new system it would be possible but not desirable.

6350. You could conceive that it would come harder on some defaulters to be pressed on the 1st April than to give them to the 1st June to pay a little more? —The difficulty there is that another debt will fall due on the 14th June.

6351. Let us deal with the one debt. The annuitant may prefer to pay the increased amount on the 1st June than pay the original debt on the 1st April?—No, because a man owing £2 9s. 9d. may have to sell the last calf to pay it, but if he has to pay £1 3s. 0d. in costs in addition he will not be able to make progress when June arrives. £1 3s. 0d. on a debt of £2 9s. 9d. is preposterous.

6352. What I want to avoid is to institute a system which will be harsher on the annuitants from the other aspect?—What class of case have you in your mind?

6353. The case of a man who is short of money. I do not suppose that all these annuitants in default are the same defaulters every time?—Substantially they are.

6354. You told Senator Farren that the reason they are in default is that they are actually unable to pay?—Yes, in some cases. In other cases the money that should be made available for the Land Commission debt is applied for other purposes.

6355. I think you accepted his general statement that it was inability to pay? —Rather than any objection to pay us.

6356. Your system does not remove the inability to pay?—Except in so far as first it will enable us to give greater consideration to appeals to the Land Commission for extension of time because of inability to pay arising from a specific cause. We cannot consider those in full at the moment, because we have to keep pace with the programme of the Courts; the District and Circuit Courts have a time-table and we must arrange the work to enable State Solicitors to proceed in those Courts.

6357. You are dealing now with the discretion of the Land Commission, notthe question of the inability of the tenant to pay. What do you think would be the opinion of the annuitant himself? Would the annuitant prefer the new system which, you say, is going to be a relief to him?—I am satisfied that an annuitant who owes £2 9s. 9d. and gets a letter from the Sheriff to pay, say, £2 12s. 6d., would be far happier than to get a civil bill for £2 9s. 9d. plus £1 3s. 0d. costs, and he would make a greater struggle to pay.

6358. Still, you say that those people are practically the same defaulters every time?—One must keep in mind the mentality of a particular group of tenant purchasers. Once they know that the Land Commission certificate of debt may arrive any day they will provide for it.

6359. You think they would prefer to be made pay earlier?—Yes, the psychological element does enter into it.

6360. At present there is a discretion in the Judge in giving a decree, and there is a discretion in the State Solicitor?—We have not allowed discretion to the State Solicitor for reasons satisfactory to us.

6361. There is a discretion in the Judge?—There is, but it is exercised only in a small number of cases, not one in a hundred.

6362. You have a good many of these annuitant cases in Donegal?—In Donegal we have quite a number of clients under the Land Act of 1923. In fact a large fraction of tenant-purchasers come under that Act. The total number of our clients in Donegal would be something in the vicinity of 35,000.

6363. What about the defaulters? Would we take the average of two-thirds in that case?—Something in the vicinity of 2,000 cases would be the subject of civil bills at the moment in Donegal.

6364. We had a District Justice from Donegal before us and he was very strongly against any proposed change from the present system. He thought the discretion given to the Judge was a great protection for poor people who did not understand the Land Commission procedure or the legal procedure at all?—That is simply the smallest factor for consideration, because the number of people who come to the Court at all would be far less than the number of people who write to us. You will have an odd one appear in Court asking for time from the Judge.

6365. I am just putting it to you that he regarded the number as sufficiently large in his case to make it a matter of consideration?—I was rather inclined to the view that his objection arose from the possibility of errors. The District Justice did refer to errors.

6366. And it was a protection against the errors?—I feel he was referring to a time when the organisation of the work in the Land Commission was on a different basis. There was a good deal of trouble when the administration of the Land Act of 1923 was in its initial stage. The rental furnished by the landlord was often wrong and imperfect.

6367. I am not arguing with you. I am putting forward his view?—He did not, possibly, fully know the causes. Take one estate, the Cunningham estate—there are 1,800 tenants. The average rent is 11s. or 12s., and various adjustments were made from time to time by the agent. The rent varied by reference to services in kind by tenants, and so on. The rent as first returned was the basis of proceedings. The figures were wrong in numerous cases. The tenants went into the Court and produced old rent receipts which differed from the demand made by the Land Commission. A more perfect world has been reached now.

6368. You speak of payments overlapping and of the annuitant getting into a position where he had more than one instalment to meet?—Yes.

6369. How many instalments do you let run as a maximum?—We will not permit him to run any if we can help it, because the hanging gale is a difficulty in itself. We certainly will not permit him to go into default if we discover that he has the means to pay.

6370. Would I be wrong in thinking that there are cases in which you allow two instalments to get into arrears so that the annuitant would owe three?—Possibly. I might mention that we have at the moment something like 11,000 cases which we are nursing.

6371. That would mean that they would be all in arrear by one instalment?—There would be one or more instalments.

6372. Under this new system of yours would there be any such elasticity as that?—There would, precisely the same. The point is that we cannot kill the goose with the golden eggs; we cannot seize the cow or sheep or horse which would constitute the means of paying the next instalment. We have to keep that in our minds; it is a recurring debt.

6373. On the question of costs, we all agree that these costs are very high in proportion to the annuity in many cases. Could you tell us what proportion on an average these costs prior to the decree bear to the costs of recovery after the decree is obtained?—Well, that varies with the amount. As the debt becomes heavier the costs are proportionately lighter.

6374. Chairman.—Could you give us any idea of the amount of the annuities for which writs would issue in a given time? Take any period you like if you have figures for it?—In the 21,000 cases that we were concerned with last March the annuities in default would represent about £258,000.

6375. Could you give us any idea what the Court costs would be on that amount? —I could not. You would have to work that out by reference to the aggregate of the individual cases. It is a scale cost. Up to £5 it is so and so; up to £10 it is so and so, and up to £15 it is so and so. There are zones.

6376. I would like to get some idea as to what amount by way of costs is put on top of the £258,000. Would I be putting it at too high a figure if I said £22,000?—I think that would be too low.

6377. Deputy Wolfe.—Are you speaking now of cases in which decrees have been issued?—The Chairman’s query is what would be the costs applicable to 21,000 cases representing a debt of £258,000 when they reach the decree stage.

6378. Would they average more than £1 in each case?—My own figure would be about £40,000.

6379. Chairman.—That means that the 21,000 tenants would have to pay £40,000 plus their annuities and the idea of your Department is to save in so far as you can the tenants from paying that extra £40,000?—Rather to make it available for our debt as far as possible.

6380. In any case that is the effect of it?—That would be the effect.

Deputy Wolfe.—Making the State pay it instead would be the effect.

6381. Senator Hooper.—Could you give us some idea as to the costs of recovery of the amount in these cases? You say the Court costs would be £40,000?—I could only answer that question on the assumption that 20,000 out of the 21,000 tenants would go to the Sheriff under the new scheme and pay the annuities on demand. That would be too much to hope for, but if that were the case you would simply have one shilling in the £ on the debt.

6382. I am assuming that the Sheriff has to seize?—If he has to levy by reference to the decree, under the present system you have £40,000 plus what the Sheriff will get.

6383. What is the Sheriff to get in addition to the £40,000?—The Sheriff’s own personal perquisites would be 1/- in the £. Then the Court messengers have to get their bit and if there is a seizure the pound keeper may have to be paid and all that class of thing.

6384. Senator Hooper.—Would it be unfair to fix £50,000 as the costs in these cases?—I am trying to strike some balance.

Deputy Wolfe.—It would all depend. The costs of a seizure one mile beyond Bandon and the costs of the seizure ten miles beyond Castletown Berehaven could not be compared. In some cases the costs subsequent to the decree would be three times as large.

6385. Senator Hooper.—So it may be that if we are relieving the defaulting annuitant of the costs prior to the decree we may be relieving him only of a comparatively small percentage of the total costs imposed upon him by the time the decree is executed?—No, because the Sheriff would get by letter what the State Solicitor gets at the moment by reference to the Civil Bill.

6286. Chairman.—The Sheriff’s costs will be the same as at the moment?—The Sheriff’s costs will be relatively small if the debt is paid on his demand. There would be no change in the costs of the Sheriff.

6387. Senator Hooper.—But the relief may not be as great as is represented here if the costs of executing the decree are large in proportion to this £40,000 of which you spoke. If, as Deputy Wolfe says, the costs of executing a decree may be three times the Solicitor’s costs prior to the granting of the decree, then the relief you propose to give is not so great? —It is, because at the moment you have the double harness; you have the State Solicitor and the Sheriff operating in the one case. Under the new procedure the case would go to the Sheriff and you would cut off one set of costs.

6388. Senator O’Rourke.—How many of the 21,000 tenants have handed to the Sheriff what they owe?—I have no means of knowing unless I go to the Sheriff, because quite a lot pay without seizure and sale.

6389. Senator Hooper.—Do you confirm the statement that State Solicitors are paid nothing after the decree is granted? —The costs I speak of represent the total costs State Solicitors can recover, irrespective of the number of letters they write.

6390. Deputy Wolfe.—He gets no costs for anything once the decree is signed? —His costs are measured and, as I have already indicated, the figure of £1 3s. would be applicable to a debt of £2 9s.

6391. Senator Hooper.—Are these costs in respect of proceedings prior to the granting of the decree?—They are in respect of all the expenses of the State Solicitor.

6392. Deputy Wolfe.—All activities after the decree has been granted are performed without remuneration?—That is exactly what I have said.

6393. Chairman.—When the scale of costs was being fixed may we take it that there was some regard paid to the work the State Solicitor would do after the decree?

Deputy Wolfe.—The solicitor collects the decree and does not charge for the collecting of it. It is to his own advantage.

6394. Senator Hooper.—There was a statement made here on another occasion to the effect that the work done by the solicitor after the decree was granted was heavier than the work before the granting of the decree?—It would depend on the case. The procedure is simple. The State Solicitor issues a civil bill, and a certificate of debt is sought from the Land Commission. We send him the certificate of debt. That certificate has to go to the District Court Clerk or Circuit Court Clerk to be compared with the civil bill. We will assume the decree is granted. It all depends on whether the defaulting tenant communicates with the State Solicitor or not. If he does, and pays, the State Solicitor takes the money and sends it to us. If he does not pay, the instructions require the solicitor to hand the decree to the Sheriff.

6395. We are told that the solicitor does most of the work after the granting of a decree, and that he gets all his payment for the work done before the decree?—There is no work in it except to receive the money, if it is sent to him. If he does not get it, then the decree goes to the Sheriff. These are, broadly, the instructions of the State Solicitor.

6396. Then you do not agree with the statement that he does the bulk of the work after the decree is granted?—No. I do not agree. The bulk of the work is delegated to the Land Commission offices,

6397. Chairman.—So if he does it he is doing something that he need not do?—Quite so.

6398. Senator Hooper.—And he is doing it voluntarily?—Yes, except where he gets authority from us.

6399. Chairman.—Could you give us some figures in relation to one important matter? In many counties the annuities are rather small, particularly in Donegal?—They are relatively small.

6400. In those cases where the annuity is eleven, twelve or thirteen shillings, what would be the costs?—A debt of 13/4 would mean costs of 11/- for the State Solicitor. Then the Sheriff’s expenses have to be met, and also the Court Messenger’s. The other expenses would be small.

6401. Have you any idea what the proportion of the costs in Donegal would be—would the costs be in or about 12/- or 13/- on a decree?—Part of Donegal is fairly good land; I think the average in Donegal would be in the vicinity of £2—that is the average half-yearly annuity.

6402. But in the case of a small annuity of, say, 13/-, the State costs would be almost equal to the annuity itself?—It would.

Deputy Wolfe.—You might have asked him does he include in the State Solicitor’s costs the costs which the State itself charges?

Chairman.—Perhaps I should have said the Court costs, not the solicitor’s costs.

Deputy Wolfe.—Yes, the Court costs.

6403. Chairman.—On this question of time the position is this—that the annuitant is supposed to pay his rent to you twice a year?—Yes.

6404. If the money has not reached you on or before the date on which it is due, you then issue a six-days’ notice?—Yes.

6405. What time elapses from the date on which the annuity is due and the time at which the notice is issued?—Speaking generally, time will elapse as between the 14th November and the 19th January. About the 19th January we start on the job and we have only four days in which to do it. We have about 120,000 notices to get out.

6406. Therefore the annuitant has got about nine weeks’ grace?—Yes.

6407. Then he gets another six days notice?—Yes.

6408. That is roughly ten weeks—you would then send on the certificate under the new system—that is ten weeks’ grace? —We would not be able to do it in less than three weeks.

6409. In the first instance the certificate is sent to the Sheriff under your scheme?—Yes.

6410. In fact then the annuitant gets nine months in which to pay—it is due on the 14th November?—Yes; it is accruing due since the 14th May. And at the end of the six months he gets thirteen weeks’ grace before the Sheriff begins to operate under your scheme?—Yes.

6411. That is what I want to get clear— when the Sheriff receives a certificate from you he would be required to issue a letter demanding payment of the debt plus some fees, say one shilling when the amount is under £1, 2/6 when it is under £3, and exceeding £3 and under £5, five shillings? —I would like a limited penalty to remain as regards costs, because without a limited penalty the number of tenants who would not pay on the six-day notice would increase.

6412. I take it that before the certificate would be sent to the Sheriff the annuitant would have got three months’ grace? —Yes, in particular cases.

6413. I take it that the Sheriff, when writing to the annuitant as required by you, would say that unless he had received the amount of the annuity plus his own costs he would make a seizure within a certain number of days?—Yes, he would give them, say, ten days.

6414. And then he would proceed to levy?—Yes.

6415. So that in fact the annuitant gets fourteen weeks—we will leave it at three months?—Yes.

6416. Senator Hooper.—What is the average grace at the moment?—I am afraid that in some cases proceedings for the December, 1929, instalment will run into May or June. At the moment several State Solicitors are unable to reach some of the defaulters on their lists until the end of this month or the beginning of June. It depends on the courts.

Senator Brown.—It depends on the sittings of the courts.

6417. Senator Hooper.—So that your system reduces the period of grace by half?—Yes.

6418. Chairman.—Is it your opinion that in the long run three months’ grace is as much as might be good for an annuitant, and that if you gave him more than three months he is doubling the debt he owes?—Yes, he is running into the next half-yearly instalment, and you have a hanging gale reached in the case of a big percentage of defaulters.

6419. Your Department is satisfied that the annuitant gets three months’ grace, and first he has the six months while the rent is accruing in which to make provision for the payment of his annuity?—Yes. It is accruing due for the six months.

6420. And then he has a further period before the Sheriff gets after him?—Yes.

(The Witness withdrew.)

The sitting concluded at 1.20 p.m.